how to protect name servers against cache corruption
Ben Black
black at zen.cypher.net
Wed Jul 30 02:13:38 UTC 1997
i say again that although it cannot be made completely secure in the
DNSSEC sense, it can absolutely be made far more resistant to some
*known* attacks without significant code changes.
ben
On Tue, 29 Jul 1997, Paul A Vixie wrote:
> Let me put this another more interesting and more direct way.
>
> Postulate a name server with the following properties:
>
> 1. Actually works on and is connected to the live Internet.
> 2. RFC compliant except as nec'y to comply with #1 above.
> 3. No DNSSEC, no TSIG, no SECUPD.
> 4. Completely bug free.
>
> You go right ahead and build that name server, and I will drive a truck,
> no, better still a bus or even a backhoe, right through its front window.
>
> DNS is not secure and cannot be made so. BIND-8.1.1 is the best there is,
> and it's what you should run, but as long as you run DNS without DNSSEC,
> your confidence level should be set accordingly.
>
> PS:
>
> BIND is definitely #1, is almost #2, is definitely #3, and trying to be #4.
>
More information about the NANOG
mailing list